Trouble logging in?If you can't remember your password or are having trouble logging in, you will have to reset your password. If you have trouble resetting your password (for example, if you lost access to the original email address), please do not start posting with a new account, as this is against the forum rules. If you create a temporary account, please contact us right away via Forum Support, and send us any information you can about your original account, such as the account name and any email address that may have been associated with it.

Well, let me put it this way then. None of the questions you have raised puts up a brick wall to my theory. Most of them I have answered explicitly in the past (and some, like "How does knowing any of this solve any problem other than the very problem it invented to justify itself?", are patently ridiculous. If the theory didn't explain anything, why would I have thought of it in the first place?). As for the remaining ones, I have ideas for all of them, each one supported by at least some evidence. I can go over them, but it'll take time (obviously).

Also, you call it Ryuukishi's failure to not provide a completely provable backstory. No, that's ridiculous. If you'd actually read a fair share of detective novels, you'd know that nearly all of them have many backstory elements that can be only guessed at, not proven. And if you're going to call Agatha Christie a failure, then it's no surprise that you'd consider Ryuukishi one no matter how well he does it. The standard you set is higher than Christie's novels. You should be aware of that.

__________________

"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers

Well... it was presented as a final trump card, something to use only in emergencies. If Beatrice threw around the Shkannon card all the time, something which would basically cause her heart to unravel if discovered, then there was a chance Battler would strike at it by accident. This is part of the reason why the FT in ep3 was so dangerous - she was putting both the Shkannon part and the Kinzo's corpse part of her heart on the line.

One narrative that makes more sense with Shkannon is that of episode 2.

Without it, it becomes:

- Everyone goes down to see the first twilight victims... except Shannon, who is too busy tending to a guest who doesn't exist.
- Jessica runs upstairs, and Kanon follows. Kanon then dissappears into thin air, never to be seen by Battler again.
- Shannon stays, but Kanon remains absent as long as she is there. Later Gohda and Shannon report that Kanon had apparently returned to life?

All of these points make more sense if they are the same person switching between personalities or aliases. Episode 3, with Shannon and Kanon coming back to life, is similar.

There's also small things - why does Battler never see Kanon's corpse (in the first game, the red truth basically guarentees the death was fake...)? Why do they never appear together even though they're so close? How can Kanon be so close to Shannon even though they could only have been together for, at most, 2 years (and possibly 6 years before Shannon went to Rokkenjima)?

I don't expect this story to be a literary masterpiece like the divine comedy. But I expect it to be well conceived, without any plot hole, and generally well written. Actually... I expect it to be better than most of your average stories of the same kind.

Ryuukishi set precise standards by repeatedly talking about trust among writer and reader and by showing us the knox rules. Now all of his readers know those rules and recognize they are good rules. Ryuukishi can't betray those expectations.

I'll be greatly dissatisfied if I were to know that I spent more than two years speculating on a mediocre story. That's why a mediocre story wouldn't cut it. It has to be a very good one.

You can expect me to take Renall's side if shkanon happens to be true without a very damn good explanation. The only difference between me and him is that I don't think it can be flat out declared that shkanon can't possibly be handled with an outstanding result. I am expecting such result.
That of course is true for ghosterika as well, because as it is it doesn't really sound any better.

All I can say right now is that shkanon in my eyes is so blatantly obvious that I can't pretend I'm not seeing it, and I don't buy the troll theory for many several reasons. I wouldn't even consider it an acceptable troll. If shkanon isn't true then I'm expecting a very good explanation not any less good than the one I'm expecting to justify shkanon.

I simply think that the solution is pretty simple. What Ryukishi said indirectly with Featherine is that the author is enlighted greatly more in the thinking process than the final result of the riddle.

I think that another significance of the logic error is that no matter the outcome, the core part is the thinking process that leads at the solution of the mistery.

I don't expect this story to be a literary masterpiece like the divine comedy. But I expect it to be well conceived, without any plot hole, and generally well written. Actually... I expect it to be better than most of your average stories of the same kind.

Ryuukishi set precise standards by repeatedly talking about trust among writer and reader and by showing us the knox rules. Now all of his readers know those rules and recognize they are good rules. Ryuukishi can't betray those expectations.

I'll be greatly dissatisfied if I were to know that I spent more than two years speculating on a mediocre story. That's why a mediocre story wouldn't cut it. It has to be a very good one.

You can expect me to take Renall's side if shkanon happens to be true without a very damn good explanation. The only difference between me and him is that I don't think it can be flat out declared that shkanon can't possibly be handled with an outstanding result. I am expecting such result.
That of course is true for ghosterika as well, because as it is it doesn't really sound any better.

All I can say right now is that shkanon in my eyes is so blatantly obvious that I can't pretend I'm not seeing it, and I don't buy the troll theory for many several reasons. I wouldn't even consider it an acceptable troll. If shkanon isn't true then I'm expecting a very good explanation not any less good than the one I'm expecting to justify shkanon.

I can't say I've never agreed with you utterly and completely before, as once or twice I have, but in this case I absolutely do agree. If Shkanon is true, the explanation better be damn good. If it can satisfy me, it can satisfy anybody.

I can't say I've never agreed with you utterly and completely before, as once or twice I have, but in this case I absolutely do agree. If Shkanon is true, the explanation better be damn good. If it can satisfy me, it can satisfy anybody.

Well, in that case, it might be more productive if we try and find a Shkanon that does work for everything. Still, I don't think we should expect that to be easy. Umineko is a long game, and it deserves a long solution to it. Even if the final answer of who dunnit and how dunnit is relatively straightforward, the path to arriving to that solution might be long.

In fact, I'd rather the logical path to reach the answer was longer instead of shorter. We've spent a lot of time reading this series, and it's be nice if all the hints must match together to give us the full story.

__________________

"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers

Jan-Poo's main point was that, if Shkannon doesn't exist, the explanation needs to be even better :/.

Basically, what we're getting at is "The explanation for any solution needs to be damn good".

Yes that was one of my point, but I'm glad that Renall understand that I don't think shkanon is true because I particularly like the idea or because it totally satisfies me as a solution.

To be blunt I also would like and ending were Jessica and Kanon, George and Shannon, Battler and Beatrice are all happy. But it's been said already that such a thing can only happen in the golden land.

I don't really want the story to take a magical turn, so I'd rather have a good bitter ending than an half-assed happy ending. Actually some of the best stories I've seen had very sad endings. The very fact that you wish for a story to end in a good way is the reason why sad endings can be so wonderful.

So no, I don't want Jessica to realize that she's been loving an illusion, and so goes for George and Battler, but if it's handled well, that will become a great ending.

Just think of EP6, who would ever wish for Shannon and Kanon to turn against each other and fight to the death? But that's precisely why it was an outstanding scene.

Well, I understand why fans want all the couples to be together, but Shkanon makes the game no different from a hundred other manga and anime with love triangles. Yeah, not everyone can be happy, but that's what makes it interesting. I don't see how love triangles can be considered anti-romance.

The romance with Shkanon, unwound, is like this (by my personal theory): Sayo fell in love with Battler, but then gave up on him when he went away. She then decided to move on and fell in love with George. Jessica fell in love with Sayo as Kanon, but Sayo couldn't bring herself to explain the situation, and rejected Jessica without telling her the full truth. Since Jessica and Sayo were best friends, Sayo would always feel guilty about this, yet equally unwilling to reciprocate Jessica's feelings, especially without telling her the truth. Then, Sayo heard that Battler was coming back, and realized that she still felt very strongly about him...but it was too late, since she had already agreed to accept George's engagement ring by then (remember, they had planned to do that in advance). This leads to the conflict within Sayo at the end: choose George or Battler or Jessica. Any choice will mean hurting someone else or herself.

__________________

"The only moral it is possible to draw from this story is that one should never throw the letter 'q' into a privet bush. But, unfortunately, there are times when it is unavoidable."
--Hitchhikers

Yeah I generally agree Chrono but there's some kind of difference here.

One thing is being refused by the person you love. If your love is pure you can still wish for that person to find happyness.

Another thing is knowing that the person you loved doesn't exist. Or you could even that that the person either Jessica or George love, is bound to disappear, which is the equivalent of death for a furniture.

I'm merely saying this to point that this isn't just a love triangle, it's more dramatic than that.

Yes that was one of my point, but I'm glad that Renall understand that I don't think shkanon is true because I particularly like the idea or because it totally satisfies me as a solution.

To be blunt I also would like and ending were Jessica and Kanon, George and Shannon, Battler and Beatrice are all happy. But it's been said already that such a thing can only happen in the golden land.

I don't really want the story to take a magical turn, so I'd rather have a good bitter ending than an half-assed happy ending. Actually some of the best stories I've seen had very sad endings. The very fact that you wish for a story to end in a good way is the reason why sad endings can be so wonderful.

So no, I don't want Jessica to realize that she's been loving an illusion, and so goes for George and Battler, but if it's handled well, that will become a great ending.

Just think of EP6, who would ever wish for Shannon and Kanon to turn against each other and fight to the death? But that's precisely why it was an outstanding scene.

The things I don't like with Shkanon is that :

Some people takes it for GRANTED.

I would be disappointed a bit then.

All this "personalities" things would break all the red truth with Jessica and Kinzo. Because swapping between Jessica/Jessie and Kinzo/Goldsmith/Desire.

Twisted logic to avoid red is twisted

But there is some points that I don't get...how does it influence on the word "people" ? Because of

Quote:

The people who were in the neighboring room at the time it was sealed were Hideyoshi, George, Kumasawa, Shannon, and Nanjo. And, there were exactly five people in the neighboring room. No one other than the people corresponding to those five names existed! All names refer only to the actual people!

All this "personalities" things would break all the red truth with Jessica and Kinzo. Because swapping between Jessica/Jessie and Kinzo/Goldsmith/Desire.

Twisted logic to avoid red is twisted

Well, it is hinted at a lot... the second is a circular reason... Goldsmith doesn't exist since Kinzo is already dead... and of course it's twisted, Beatrice was getting Battler out of a logic error :P. Again, if you can think of a more sensible solution, I'd like to hear it.

Quote:

But there is some points that I don't get...how does it influence on the word "people" ? Because of

There's nothing wrong with it if Kanon doesn't exist while Shkannon is in Shannon mode.

Well, it is hinted at a lot... the second is a circular reason... Goldsmith doesn't exist since Kinzo is already dead... and of course it's twisted, Beatrice was getting Battler out of a logic error :P. Again, if you can think of a more sensible solution, I'd like to hear it.

There's nothing wrong with it if Kanon doesn't exist while Shkannon is in Shannon mode.

The problem I have is the process of "Personalities swap"
Say decides to be "Kanon" and then The person "Shannon" become "Kanon" ? (the contrary works too)
But then, if this is like "From now on, I will became Kanon" then it brakesThe only one who can claim Kanon's name is the person himself!
A different person cannot claim his name!

Because becoming another person without claiming a name, even "in your mind" would say that swapping personalities is...independent from Sayo's will ?

Well, it is hinted at a lot... the second is a circular reason... Goldsmith doesn't exist since Kinzo is already dead... and of course it's twisted, Beatrice was getting Battler out of a logic error :P. Again, if you can think of a more sensible solution, I'd like to hear it.

Yeah but the logical extreme of "personalities can die" is Kinzotrice.

That is, "Kinzo" is dead, but the body once addressed as Ushiromiya Kinzo continues to exist under governance of a personality which is not considered "Kinzo."

I'd like to point out that Kanon was never declared dead in the Battler closed room... just non-existant.

And we've received red and gold truth regarding Kinzo's corpse, making him very dead. Also, we've received no reason at all to doubt that Kinzo is his real name, wheras we're TOLD that Shannon and Kanon are aliases.

I'd like to point out that Kanon was never declared dead in the Battler closed room... just non-existant.

And we've received red and gold truth regarding Kinzo's corpse, making him very dead. Also, we've received no reason at all to doubt that Kinzo is his real name, wheras we're TOLD that Shannon and Kanon are aliases.

Here's the problem with that: Kinzotrice would just say "Yeah, of course Kinzo was his real name, but 'Ushiromiya Kinzo' died as a personality and Goldsmith took over! He renounced being Kinzo forever and no longer counts as him, therefore the red can declare that he's dead or doesn't exist!"

There is no particularly perfect counter for this if we believe you can just stop being a person. Logically, Kanon is always Kanon, no matter who else he happens to be. That leaves us to conclude that either:

Kanon truly did disappear from the room.

Kanon died outright and completely.

There exists some rule which allows Kanon to "die" but the body that was Kanon not to die, but that rule has some strict construction that prevents Kinzo from being alive.

Well, you're always bound to your real name, but you're not bound to aliases. I can change my internet alias and start using a different username, for instance. If I stop using Leafsnail, you could say that Leafsnail no longer exists.

In a similar way, if the idea of Kanon is discarded, perhaps Kanon no longer exists.

You can say this stuff about Kinzo if you like, but the fact is there's no basis in foreshadowing or anything else for it, while there is basis for saying that Kanon and Shannon are "aliases used only for work". That and we have golden truth confirmation on his body.

And if Kanon died, he'd still exist in the closet. It doesn't solve it.

Basically, I don't see any other way out. He isn't allowed to leave the room even if we find some ultra-clever method X, and dying won't allow him to escape. Personality death (with or without Shkannon) seems like the only option to me.